Annual Address 



OF THE 



President of the American Society 
for Psychical Research. 



JANUARY 12, 1886. 



I 



I 



GCT'l2JW»° 




ADDRESS OF THE PRESIDENT. 

It might naturally be expected that in addressing you on the 
present occasion your president should enter into an account 
of work done and results gained. There are, however, difficul- 
ties in the way of doing this in a satisfactory way. It has been 
my misfortune to reside so far from the seat of the society, that 
I have not been able to take that active part in your work 
which would have been appropriate to my office. Moreover, so 
far as I have followed this work, it would seem that up to the 
present time it consists more in preliminary efforts, and prepara- 
tions for further research, than in finished experiments leading 
to establish conclusions. Under such circumstances, the ques- 
tion in what direction our efforts should tend is a most impor- 
tant one ; and I shall, therefore, ask your permission to enter 
into a discussion of the general aspect and relations of the 
subject. 

Looking at the situation from the most general point of view, 
the first' question to present itself would be : Why are we here? 
what is our field of work ? We might reply in a way equally 
general, that we are investigating t those obscure mental phe- 
nomena which do not seem to accord with the laws of mental 
action as ordinarily apprehended through the experience of the 
race. We are more particularly concerned with a large class of 
sporadic, but well-known phenomena, which seem to indicate 
that the mind may possess certain susceptibilities outside the 
limits which experience teaches us is commonly imposed upon 
its powers. 

We are perfectly familiar with a certain system of inter- 
action between mind and matter. Every instance of voluntary 
motion, and every instance of a mental effect produced by an 
external cause, is a case of such inter-action. Taking any one 
mind, we may consider it either as an agent producing effects 
external to itself by the action of the will, or as an object acted 
upon by external causes. Now, a very wide induction from 
general experience shows us that this inter-action is, in our 
ordinary experience, subject to the following restrictions : — 

Firstly, no individual mind can be acted upon except through 



Address of the I* resident. 

the medium of a material organism with which it is associated. 
The external cause, whatever it may be, must act on the organ- 
ization itself in order that the mind may either be excited to 
consciousness, or affected in any other way. Moreover, the 
action of such external causes is a physical process, subject to 
purely physical laws. 

Secondly, the mind cannot act upon any thing external to 
itself, except through the agency of its material organism ; and, 
this organism being set in action, the effect is subject to purely 
physical laws. 

Both of these laws are strikingly illustrated in our every- 
day experience. For example, if a living organism is left 
unsupported, it will fall exactly like dead matter, in spite of 
any thing the mind can do to stop it. When supported, it 
presses upon the support with a force equal to the weight of 
the matter composing it ; and no effort of the will can increase 
or diminish this pressure. Two persons in each other's neigh- 
borhood cannot be conscious of each other's existence except 
through the physical medium of light, sound, or material mo- 
tion, produced by one and acting upon the organism of the 
other. By no act of the will can we produce motion or any 
other change in an external object unless we set in operation a 
sufficient physical force through the medium of our organism. 
These, I say, are hypothetical laws, and may be regarded as 
conclusions from general experience. They are, however, like 
all other general laws, in seeming disaccord with occasional 
phenomena. It is these sporadic phenomena with which we are 
mainly concerned, and which we desire to subject to some form 
of law. If mind is not subject to the restrictions which have 
been just defined, we have a mental actio in distans which is 
variously known as "thought-transference," "telepathy," and 
"mind-reading." Granting this apparent actio in distans, we 
may either suppose it real, or attribute it to some unrecognized 
physical agency. This question will, however, arise at a later 
period in our researches. The main question with which we 
are now concerned is, Can one mind influence another in any 
other way than through the action of known physical causes 
acting between and through their respective organisms? If 
this question is answered in the affirmative, then a great dis~ 



Address of the President. 

covery is made, opening up a new field, not only of research, 
but of philosophical speculation and of practical application. 
If answered in the negative, our work is not done, because we 
then have to explain the sporadic phenomena which seem to 
indicate thought-transference. 

Let us begin by looking at the question from its two sides, 
beginning with the affirmative one. If we consider the current 
of our mental processes while sitting listlessly at our desks, we 
may find our minds to wander in a half-unconscious way from 
one subject to another. Vague emotions of various kinds may 
arise without our being able to assign any reason for them. 
We may feel elated without being conscious of any agreeable 
event to cause elation, and depressed without having heard any 
evil tidings. The visual image of absent friends, or the thought 
of an exciting scene which has been before us, may arise un- 
bidden. Memories follow each other without any apparent logi- 
cal order. Ideas come and go as if of their own accord. 

That these mental impressions are all results of sufficient 
causes, is a conclusion so instinctive that we can feel no doubt 
of its truth, and therefore shall take it for granted. The first 
question which arises is whether the causes are all contained, 
consciously or unconsciously, within the organism ; or whether 
they may operate and produce their effect through it from 
outside, without the mediation of the organism. Considering 
the subject apart from our general experience of the world, 
there does not seem to be any reason, a priori, why we should 
admit one of these hypotheses rather than the other. The 
belief that the impressions of distant friends or relatives are in 
some way reproduced in our minds, is one generally entertained 
in infancy. Neither to the infant nor to the adult mind need 
the question, how can such impressions be conveyed from mind 
to mind, cause any more difficulty than the question how a 
body millions of miles away can exert force upon a ball in my 
hand. If we know by experience that the force is exerted, that 
must satisfy us. The discovery of the medium, if any, by 
which the effect is produced, is a different and independent 
problem. 

The mental operations alluded to may be rationally attrib- 
uted, not only to the action of distant minds known to us, but 



Address of the President. 

to that of minds otherwise totally unknown. It is not uncom- 
mon among some classes to attribute those varying mental 
states which they cannot otherwise account for to the action of 
intelligences in another and invisible sphere. From a scientific 
point of view, the whole question is an open one, except so far 
as it may have been settled by observation and experiment. 

The opinion that a mind can act where the organism is not 
is one which we know to have been held in one form or another 
by men in all ages. In it originates the belief in the possession 
of miraculous powers by gifted beings. Indeed, were we asked 
what is the distinguishing mark of the conception of a miracle, 
as it exists in the mind of a believer, we might reply by saying 
that it is the belief that certain gifted persons possess the 
power of producing effects through the immediate agency of 
their minds, without bringing into action any sufficient plrysical 
cause. Although the belief in the possibility of such a power 
is stronger and more general among the lower races, we cannot 
say that men of any race or degree of intelligence are wholly 
free from it. From his own observations the writer believes 
that one-third of the intelligent people of his acquaintance in 
England and America are more 01 less under its influence. 
The fact that the majority of the soundest thinkers not only do 
not accept the opinion, but look upon it with a greater or less 
degree of contempt, as an evidence of mental weakness, exerts 
a repressive effect upon its free expression, and thus diminishes 
its apparent prevalence. 

The speaker distinctly remembers the development of his 
own ideas on the subject in childhood. Remarks dropped in 
the conversation of others, coupled with a deep feeling of the 
wide range of possibilities involved in the universe so newly 
opened to his mind, led him to grasp with some eagerness at 
the idea that impressions might be conveyed from one sym- 
pathetic mind to another at great distances. But continued 
observation never showed the slightest connection between his 
own mental states and those of his friends or relatives. One 
attempt to put the supposed law to a practical use is still dis- 
tinctly remembered. He set out for a schoolhouse where his 
father (the teacher) usually remained a short time after school 
to read. He was extremely desirous of reaching his father be- 



Address of the President. 

fore the latter should leave, and therefore exerted himself to tha 
utmost to concentrate his desires on the father in such manner 
as to induce him to remain. Arrived at the schoolhouse, lie 
found him still there, but just about to leave. The boy inquired 
diligently of the father whether he had felt any unusual disposi- 
tion to remain. The reply was. that he had remained only to 
finish what he had just been reading, and that lrc had felt no 
impression whatever tending to make him stay. The natural 
conclusion was adverse to what is now called telepathy, and it 
may be supposed that the majority of thinking men reach the 
same conclusion in much the same way. 

When we look carefully into the subject, we find that the 
general course of experience tends in this direction. The fact 
that many drugs stimulate in the highest degree the mental 
processes which I have sought to describe, gives color to the 
view that their origin is not without the organism. In our 
common life-experience we find that one mind acts on another 
only through the medium of physical causes emanating from one 
organism and reaching the other. It is quite true that the con- 
necting link may be so delicate as almost to evade recognition. 
Shades of feeling in one mind are made known to another by 
changes in the countenance so slight and delicate as to entirely 
evade description. But the medium of communication is al- 
ways present in the light, which, reflected from one face, paints 
its image on the retina of the eye. This is shown very conclu- 
sively by the fact, that, if the room is darkened, the one will cease 
to be conscious of the feelings of the other. We also find that 
it is not at all necessary to the conveyance of intelligence by 
such connecting physical causes that the person receiving the 
intelligence, or otherwise acted upon, should be conscious of it. 
He may have no more conception of the mode of action than 
the opium-eater has of the causes of his visions. 

If thought-transference really exists, it has hitherto failed in 
the case where its agency has been most urgently required by 
society. A man on trial for murder knows well whether he has 
or has not done the deed ; and his mind is agitated by im- 
pressions, which, could they be conveyed to those who sur- 
round him. would settle the question of his guilt or innocence. 
Yet no case has yet arisen where judge or jury have been con- 



Address of the Pre side tit. 

Bcious of any mental effect caused by the transfer of impres- 
sions from the mind of the prisoner which could help them to 
decide this question. In great cities we are surrounded by 
many thousands of our fellow-men in every stage of mental 
excitement. Yet, if we close our eyes and ears, we are wholly 
unconscious of any impression which we can trace to emanations 
proceeding from their minds. 

But a conclusion tints reached is not necessarily beyond fur- 
ther investigation. We must admit, that, until the formation 
of our parent society in England, no one ever undertook ex- 
haustive experiments to determine whether there is or is not 
any such action. If the action in question is weak, obscure, or 
rare, it might well elude the rough tests which have hitherto 
been applied. The undoubted fact that the belief is generally 
found in very bad company, though suspicious, is not conclu- 
sive. The phenomena of hypnotism afford an excellent illus- 
tration of an analagous case. It must be admitted that these 
phenomena have always been found in very bad company. 
From this fact alone they scarcely received any attention from 
investigators for nearly a century ; and many rejected them as 
spurious, or as the result of collusion between the operator and 
his subject. But, when once taken up in a scientific spirit, a 
new condition of the nervous system was discovered, the re- 
sults of which upon our knowledge we cannot yet foresee. 

We must not overlook another side of the case. The theo- 
ries which the performers presented to the public, and by which 
they professed to explain the phenomena, were as false and as 
spurious as any one had ever supposed them. There was only 
a residuum of truth at the bottom of a great mass of fraudu- 
lent pretension. Yet that residuum was well worth collecting. 

The conclusion which an unbiassed mind should take of the 
subject, in advance of any investigation or evidence, seems to be 
this: Leaving out all theories founded on anj T supposed rela- 
tion of the mind to the nervous system, there can be no sound 
reason for denying the possibility of mental action at a dis- 
tance. At the same time, the probabilities of the case are 
against it. As it is always best to bet against any individual 
horse winning a race, or any single number occurring at a turn 
of the roulette table, so it is sound to consider .the probabilities 



Address of the President. 

of the case to be against any scientific theory of the class re- 
ferred to. In other words, the burden of proof is on the side 
of the affirmative. 

On this side we have a mass of evidence so great that we 
cannot deal with it in detail, unless our task is facilitated by 
reference to those logical principles which should direct our 
thoughts. In order to avoid employing these principles in too 
abstract a form, I shall borrow them directly from our common- 
sense methods of drawing conclusions in every-day life. It is, 
however, necessary to lay bare the frame-work which underlies 
these methods, and in doing this I must ask your close atten- 
tion for a few moments. 

Every explanation of natural phonomena, when complete, 
involves two elements, — a general law and a particular fact. 
The former may, and nearly always is, taken for granted as too 
well known to need statement. And, in fact, the ordinary 
mind, how much soever influenced by it, seldom comprehends 
it with entire clearness. Yet it must exist in the intellect, 
consciously or unconsciously. 

Walking in the fields, I hear a sharp explosion. I explain it 
by the fact that some one has fired a gun. In doing this, I 
assume the general law that the firing of a gun causes an explo- 
sive sound. To one unacquainted with this general fact, the 
statement that a gun had been fired would afford no adequate 
explanation. He would see no connection between the sound 
he had heard, and my statement that it was caused by firing a 
gun, until he apprehended the general law. 

Sitting at your desk on a sultry afternoon, you find the air 
gradually growing dark. A flash of light suddenly illuminates 
the room. The explanation which at once presents itself is 
that the .darkness is caused by a thunder-cloud, and that the 
flash is the result of an electric discharge in the cloud. Here 
you have in mind the general laws, that a thunder-cloud cuts 
off a large part of the solar light, and that an electric discharge 
produces a brilliant flash. If you never knew that an electric 
discharge produced a flash, the explanation would fail. But 
the supposition of the particular fact that a cloud is passing at 
the moment is equally necessary to the explanation. 

I need not stop to point out how the general laws necessary 



Address of the P resident. 

to the explanation of natural phenomena are inferred by induc- 
tion. Every rational mind, in the course of its development, 
may be said to apprehend, consciously or unconsciously, a con- 
tinual increasing number of laws of nature. Perhaps the qual- 
ification "rational" may not here be required. It may be said 
that all the higher .animals reach a conception of such laws, 
and that the only difference is that the irrational animals enter- 
tain this conception unconsciously, while rational minds enter- 
tain it consciously, and can separate it from that of the special 
facts in which it is exhibited. 

The main fact which I wish to illustrate by this digression is 
that every mind, in the course of its development, is modifying 
or adding to its conceptions of the laws of nature. The higher 
order of minds continually group the laws apprehended by 
minds of a lower order, under some more general laws ; and it 
is in this grouping that scientific progress consists. We may 
say that all the laws apprehended by the common man are 
grouped by the scientific theorizer under more general laws. 
In the common mind, there are a great number of laws of 
nature determining the occurrence of physical pain or pleas- 
ure, heat, cold, blows, contact with acids, disease, injuries. 
In the cultivated mind, this complex system of laws assumes 
the form of a few more general and simple laws. But how 
far soever the work of generalizing laws may be carried, they 
can never be applied to the explanation of phenomena without 
evoking some special fact, or system of facts, to which they 
apply. 

It follows, that, when a phenomenon is presented to us which 
we find it difficult or impossible to explain, we must conclude, 
either that we have some new law of nature to apprehend, or 
that some particular facts which we do not see are present to 
modify the action of known laws. Whether our difficulties 
arise from ignorance of the law or of the fact, is a question 
which in some cases involves great difficulty, while in others 
the mind settles it without question. The untutored man, who 
for the first time sees iron in a state of fusion, learns correctly 
the (to him) new general law that iron is melted by heat. But 
he may infer a new law when he really has to deal only with a 
known law, acting through facts which are concealed from him. 



Address of the President. 

A juggler holds in front of him a dish of water filled with jelly- 
fish. An assistant having thrown a large handkerchief over 
the dish, the juggler rolls the handkerchief in a lump; and ves- 
sel, water, and fish have all disappeared. A looker-on might 
see in this the evidence of some new law of nature, in virtue 
of which a mass of matter could become invisible ; but the bet- 
ter informed spectator knows that something has been done 
under the handkerchief which he did not see, and that no new 
law of nature comes into play. He might find it impossible to 
explain, even to his own satisfaction, how the disappearance lias 
come about: but this ignorance does not in any way diminish 
his confidence that the phenomenon can be fully explained by 
the presence of some particular circumstances of which he is 
ignorant. 

I hope that the main principle which I wish to enforce will 
now be clearly apprehended. When a set of phenomena pre- 
sents themselves to us, apparently defying explanation, we may 
conclude either that some law of nature of which we have 
before remained ignorant has come into play, or that the 
result is due to known laws acting under particular circum- 
stances of which we are ignorant. The whole question of the 
reality of psychic force is of this kind. We have seen thought 
transferred from mind to mind. The evidence of the transfer 
in some cases is beyond doubt. The question is, Did it take 
place through some physical connection between two organisms 
which eludes our scrutiny, but which, had we seen it, we should 
have recognized as involving no new principle, or did some new 
law of nature come into play? Is there any criterion by which 
we can decide between these two hypotheses? The history of 
scientific investigation shows that there is. But, before point- 
ing it out, let us glance at the subject from a slightly different 
standpoint. 

Phenomena which we are unable to explain at the moment 
are of almost daily occurrence. Every sound which we hear, 
and of which we cannot state the origin, belongs to this class. 
The course of our thoughts, and the internal physical pains 
so familiar to humanity, frequently belong to the same class. 
Indeed, the number of particular facts which we do not know 
is so very great, that our natural impulse is always to attribute 



Address of the President. 

any inexplicable phenomenon, not to some new law, but to 
some unknown combination of circumstances. In many cases 
we call phenomena thus arising spurious, not because they are 
unreal, but because we may suspect that circumstances which 
give rise to them have been intentionally produced to deceive 
us. The word would, however, bear a connotation which we 
should avoid applying to the present case without explanation. 

One very natural way of investigating the question whether 
inexplicable phenomena belong to the class just mentioned is 
that followed by our parent society. It consists in carefully 
investigating all the attendant circumstances with a view of 
finding whether they afford a sufficient explanation of the phe- 
nomenon under known laws. If investigation shows the pres- 
ence of conditions under which the phenomenon could be pro- 
duced by such laws of nature, it is then assumed that no new 
law comes into play ; but if the most searching investigation 
fails to discover any such conditions, then it is to be concluded 
that a new law of nature is established, with a greater or less 
degree of probability. 

Although this method is in perfect accord with our ordinary 
modes of investigating phenomena involving no new law, }*et I 
must, with all due respect to those who have applied it, express 
my dissent from its validity as a method of discovering such 
laws. In fact, it is not in accordance with our e very-day habit 
of inference to infer a new law by this method. I think the 
following illustration will make this habit clear. 

Let us have presented to us fifty phenomena, all belonging, 
so far as we can see at the first glance, to one class, and all 
apparently inexplicable without assuming some new law. We 
proceed, however, to investigate, with a view of determining 
whether they are not the product of circumstances not evident 
at the moment. Suppose, to fix the ideas, that the separate 
phenomena are fifty in number : it matters not whether fifty 
repetitions of the same thing, or fifty separate occurrences of 
the same general character, all differing in their details. What 
connects them together is some element of similarity. They may 
be produced by one person, or they may show certain likenesses 
in virtue of which they supposed them explainable by some one 
new law. 



Address of the President. 

We now proceed to investigate. A very little examination 
shows that twenty of them are the product of known causes 
which we did not at first see. More careful examination, ex- 
tended through several hours or days, explains twenty more 
in the same way ; leaving only ten from which to infer a new 
law. Bringing in new means of investigation, and devoting 
increased industry to the work, we succeed in explaining five 
more, one by one ; leaving yet five which defy our powers. Are 
we to conclude that these five do not belong to the same class 
as the others, that there cannot possibly be any circumstances 
unknown to us which have produced them, and that some new 
law of nature is therefore established? I think not. I think 
the man of well-balanced mind in such a case always reasons 
thus: As first presented to me, these phenomena were all of the 
same general character. All seemed to point to the existence 
of a new law of nature. All had the character of individuals 
claiming that the} r were not the product of known causes. But, 
as I went through the investigation, I find that ninety per cent 
of them had deceived me in various ways by being the product 
of known causes, concealed from my sight. As some of these 
hidden causes require little investigation for their discovery, 
others yet more ; and as my powers of investigation are limited, 
and I can never be sure that no unknown causes are present, — 
I therefore conclude that the remaining ten per cent are the 
product of circumstances which have onl}' the common property 
of eluding my present powers of investigation. 

This is, in fact, the method of reasoning which we always 
adopt in eveiy-day life. " We adopt it because we know that 
circumstances are constantly present, the discovery of which 
eludes all our powers. No one claims the ability to explain 
every thing he sees and hears in one day. He knows that un- 
known causes are continually present, and is satisfied to relegate 
inexplicable phenomena to their action. Hence, the method of 
investigation in question can only show satisfactorily our in- 
ability to discover the true cause, and can never justify us in 
concluding that a new law of nature comes into play. 

The true method of investigation is exemplified by the whole 
history of physical science. The general laws of nature are per- 
permanent : the special circumstances under which they act are 



Address of the P resident. 

continually varying. We see a law only in a sequence of phe- 
nomena permanent in its character. This system is also in per- 
fed accord with our common-sense method of drawing conclu- 
sions. When the same phenomenon occurs under the same 
conditions time after time, we infer a law of nature. When we 
cannot trace its repetition to any common set of conditions, we 
conclude that it is due to varying circumstances, perhaps un- 
known to us. 

It is a characteristic of all scientific progress, that, when we 
ascertain any new law connecting phenomena, we are able to 
produce them with continually increasing facility. Take the 
case of electricity, for example. Before regular experiments 
were made, electrical phenomena were so little known that they 
might have been deemed entirely spurious. The early experi- 
menters met great difficulty in reproducing them at pleasure. 
Sometimes they appeared, and sometimes they did not. Some- 
times electricity was conducted from one body to another, and 
sometimes it was not. But, as investigation went on, there was 
a regular progress, step by step, until a stage was reached at 
which all the phenomena could be produced at pleasure, and 
fully explained by known laws and attendant circumstances. 

How does psychic research stand this test? I think we must 
all admit, that, up to the present time, it does not stand it at all. 
The unwelcome fact seems to be that we have absolutely no 
general knowledge that we did not have ten years ago. We 
have seen that there is sometimes an apparent transfer of thought, 
and that impressions are apparently produced from time to 
time by unknown causes. We knew this as well before we 
began our investigation as we do now. If any new law of 
nature is involved, what is its character? Let us grant that 
thought is sometimes transferred. What question will then 
arise ? I reply, that the first question to be considered is under 
what circumstances and conditions, and b} T what agencies, is it 
transferred? That these circumstances, conditions, or agencies 
are exceptional, is perfectly obvious. Were they universal and 
general, our minds would be affected by those of the thousands 
who surround us. We know that they are not so affected. 
The whole question, is, therefore, under what conditions are men- 
tal impressions of any kind communicated from mind to mind 



Address of the President. 

without the intervention of known physical causes? I have 
carefully studied the proceedings of our parent society, as well 
as articles in magazines describing cases of supposed thought- 
transference, without being able to find any answer whatever 
to this question. 

Let us now look more closely into the history of the inves- 
tigation. As our own work is in some sort a continuance of 
that of the English society, we may begin by recalling certain 
extremely interesting experiments of the former, which, if prop- 
erly followed up, might be expected to lead to a definite con- 
clusion. 

In the latter part of the year 1882, some members of the 
society learned through Mr. Douglas Blackburn, an associate, 
that a mesmerist of Brighton, named Smith, had the power of 
describing impressions existing in Mr. Blackburn's mind. After 
some tests of this power, it was found that Mr. Smith could 
copy a drawing of which it was supposed he had no knowledge, 
except as it existed in Mr. Blackburn's memory. In copying 
the drawings, the "percipient," Mr. Smith, sat at a table, blind- 
folded, while behind him sat the "agent," Mr. Blackburn, 
thinking intently on the form of the drawing as he had just 
seen it. Very soon Mr. Smith began to make a copy of the 
drawing so like the original that no doubt could exist of a 
relation between the two. This copying of drawings was prac- 
tised in December, 1882, in Brighton, and again for three or 
four days during the following month in London. 

It was afterwards found that two young ladies in a large 
drapery establishment in Liverpool possessed a similar power; 
and reports on them were made to the society by their em- 
ployer, Mr. Malcolm Guthrie, J. P., and by Professor Lodge. 
In some respects these trials are more complete than those 
made with Mr. Smith, since a number of persons seem to have 
acted successfully as agents. Out of a total of one hundred 
and fifty drawings, only sixteen are given ; so that the data for 
deducing any law bearing upon the subject are entirely wanting. 

These copies of drawings have a great advantage over ver- 
bal descriptions, in that the record can be made the subject of 
future study. It was found that the three or four persons able 
to copy invisible drawings were also able, as we may well sup- 



Address of the President* 

pose, to describe invisible objects. It is difficult to see how one 

could draw an object unless lie had some conception of it in his 
mind, and with this conception he should be able to describe it. 

There was also one interesting case of an apparently marvel- 
lous power of naming objects thought of by others. The Rev. 
A M. Creery discovered that his four little girls, as well as a 
waiting-maid in his family, possessed this power in a remarkable 
degree. A child being sent out of the room, an object to be 
thought of was agreed upon by the company, or a card was 
drawn from a pack and passed around. On being called back 
to the room, the child was very soon able to name the card or 
object. What is yet more wonderful, the power was not con- 
fined to merely material objects, but extended to the guessing 
of numbers and names which could convey no definite idea to 
a child's mind. Judging from the number of reports made 
about these children, it would seem that some definite conclu- 
sion might have been hoped for. 

The question which now arises is, Does all this prove that in 
this case thought was transferred from one person to another 
without the intervention of previously recognized agencies? 
The principles I have already enunciated will lead us to answer 
this question in the negative. All investigation of this kind 
should assume in advance that the phenomena which we observe 
are the result of certain causes, or are associated with certain 
conditions ; and that when these causes or conditions are repro- 
duced, the phenomenon will recur. Until these causes or con- 
ditions are discovered, nothing can be inferred. 

What science concerns itself with is not the mere recurrence 
of the phenomena, but the nature of the relation between the 
cause and the effect. Such isolated facts as that some particu- 
lar man in the fifteenth century got well of a disease after a 
priest had laid hands upon him, or that a little girl at a certain 
time guessed a card she did not see, are in themselves of no sci- 
entific interest or importance, however well they may be fitted 
to excite our curiosity. What we want to discover is the 
invariable relation by which every sick man of a definable class, 
upon whom the right kind of a priest lays his hands, shall be 
cured ; and to discover all the conditions under which a little 
girl can name a card. Until these conditions can be discovered, 



Address of the President 

we have no right to attribute the result to one cause rather 
than to another. It is true that we have not the right to 
demand that every little girl shall be able to name the card 
under the given conditions. There may be only one girl out 
of a thousand, or only one out of a million, who possesses the 
required power, just as there is only one man out of a thousand 
who can integrate a differential equation. At the same time, 
the eases must be numerous enough to make them a subject of 
some kind of investigation, and to deduce from them a state- 
ment of some kind of general law. The rarer they are. the 
greater the attention that should be devoted to them when 
found. 

Again, in the case of the drawings, as well as in the other cases, 
the same question arises. We have given, an "agent" A, and 
a "percipient" P. It is found that an impression of some sort 
is conveyed from A to P. What we want to know is. how it 
is conveyed. When we can answer this question, we shall be 
able to say whether a new theory of mind is to be established. 
To find how it is conveyed, the very first step is to determine 
by experiment the laws of conveyance : that is. the conditions 
necessary and sufficient to the transmission. The first ques- 
tions which would arise might be the following: — 

Whether the power on the part of A diminishes with the 
distance from P ; and, if so. according to what apparent law? 

Whether at any given distance the relative position of the 
two parties affects the result? 

Whether the intervention of a material obstacle, such as a 
door, interferes with the transmission of the impression ? 

Whether the presence of light or darkness affects the result? 

Whether sight on the part of either A or P is necessary 

Whether the result is any more successful when the object 
or idea selected originates with the agent than with some other 
person ? 

Whether the presence of any particular person is necessary? 

After these questions are all answered, other details without 
number would arise. But these would come first. 

It does not appear, that, up to the present time, either the 
parent society or our own has been able to decide any of these 
questions. When the experiments were begun, it was indeed 



Address of the President 

sought to determine whether contact between Mr. Blackburn 
and Mr. Smith was necessary. This question was decided in the 
negative. In another case, where the trials were made with 
Messrs. Blackburn and Smith, the observers, after making 
eleven numbered experiments, placed the two men in separate 
rooms. It was then found that the communication failed. 
But there was no inquiry why it failed, and no statement 
whether the door was open or shut, or whether the parties 
were farther apart than they were when the experiment suc- 
ceeded. 

Whatever view we may take of this matter, it seems to me, 
that, in the absence of any consideration or decision upon the 
various questions which I have raised respecting the conditions 
of thought-transference, we are not entitled to conclude that 
any causes come into play in the matter except unknown con- 
ditions. This view is strengthened by another consideration 
to which I shall call your attention. I have alread}^ alluded to 
the general fact in the history of scientific investigation, that, 
when sequences of phenomena which are rare in themselves 
become a subject of inquiry, their reproduction and observation 
become easier an'd easier. Two centuries ago the phenomena 
of electricity produced by artificial excitation were extremely 
rare and had little variety. But, as science advanced, new 
methods of producing electrical effects were discovered, and 
the conditions of the production of electricity became easier 
and easier to fulfil. Now no one has any doubt or difficulty 
about the method of producing electrical phenomena at 
pleasure. Why this should be so is obvious. The more we 
study a phenomenon which is the product of a law of nature 
acting under certain conditions, the more likely we are to dis- 
cover such conditions. The more we find out about them, the 
easier it will be to produce them, or to determine the law of 
their recurrence. Easier investigation is therefore the almost 
necessary result of scientific progress. 

On the other hand, if the phenomenon becomes more rare as 
we proceed, we reach the conclusion that it is not associated 
with any given conditions by a law of nature, but is onl} T the 
result of accidental or unknown circumstances unassociated 
with any new law. I may, perhaps, borrow an astronomical 



Address of the President. 

illustration of this principle. We know that astronomical 
records contain many observations of dark bodies passing over 
the disk of the sun. It has frequently been supposed that 
these phenomena were due to the transits of unknown inter- 
Mercurial planets. But. when we look into the history of the 
subject, we find that such observations are nearly always made 
by comparatively inexperienced observers, with imperfect in- 
struments; and that as instruments are improved, and observers 
acquire practice, they gradually disappear. These facts alone 
have sufficed to render astronomers sceptical as to their reality. 
The fact that the observations cannot be reconciled with each 
other in such a way as to show that they belong to the same 
body is generally considered to afford nearly conclusive proof 
of their spurious character. In fact, we may regard this charac- 
ter as now fully established. 

Guided by this analogy, let us see what we should expect the 
history of psychical research to be, were thought-transference 
real. An investigator would have found one or more persons 
possessing some power of influencing the minds of others by a 
direct transfer of ideas. It would probably have been found 
that some ideas were transferred more readily than others, and 
that the transfer was better marked under some conditions than 
under others. The discovery of these ideas and their conditions 
would in its turn have facilitated the study vi the transfer by 
teaching how to secure it, and thus the body of knowledge 
would have gone on increasing. This knowledge would have 
resulted in the discovery of other laws, and in the gradual en- 
largement of the number of people who possessed the power. 
Finally the investigators would have been able to say: If you 
consider this or that form of thought : if you select a certain 
definable class of people, and proceed in a certain way, — then 
you will be able, when you please, to observe thought-trans- 
ference. 

Such has not been the history of the case. The most careful 
collection of facts and observations during three years has failed 
to show any common feature in the ideas transferred, and has 
thrown no light on the question of the condition under which 
the phenomena can occur. The theory cannot be reconciled on 
any reasonable hypothesis, even that of thought-transference, 



Address of the President. 

With the absence of such action where we should most ex- 
peot it. 

When we consider the importance of the problems which 
were presented, we cannot but feel regret that so little public 
attention was given to the subject. If we accept the conclusion 
of thought-transference, we have the startling result that there 
were and probably still are in England a number of people 
possessed of the power of perceiving or being affected by what 
is going on in other men's minds. Why did not Parliament 
grant the necessary funds to enable these people to be collected, 
supported at the public expense, and experimented upon? 
"Practice makes perfect," says the proverb; and it might well 
be hoped that, after a little well-directed practice, these people 
could perceive the thoughts and memories in the minds of mur- 
derers and robbers, and thus do away at one stroke with one 
of the greatest difficulties in administering justice. Instead of 
this, the parties and the subject have been lost sight of, so far 
at least as appears from published records. 

To suppose that the society has made no effort to utilize the 
knowledge acquired during its existence, by discovering other 
persons possessed of the powers in question, would be too 
severe a reflection upon its eminent membership for any one to 
indulge in. In the absence of evidence to the contraiy, we are 
to presume that a very careful search has been kept up. But, 
if this is so, not only have no new discoveries been made, but 
the old ones, if we can call the conclusions by that name, have 
not been confirmed. 

I feel it a great misfortune that I have not been able to take 
an active part in the work of this society, and am not fully 
acquainted with its latest details. So far, however, as I have 
learned, we have been less successful than the parent society in 
finding satisfactory subjects- of investigation. We might almost 
say that careful search has failed to bring us subjects to be ex- 
perimented upon. An exception to this is found in the case of 
one of our most eminent members, who has been experimenting 
upon mesmerized persons. His work having not yet been com- 
municated to the society, I must speak of it with much reserve, 
and may possibly be out of strict order in alluding to it at all. 
I cannot, however, refrain from citing one result which he has 



Address of the President. 

verbally communicated to me. It is well known that mesmer- 
ized persons are those supposed to be most susceptible to the 
reception of agencies exerted by other minds without physical 
communication. I learn, however, that our fellow-experimenter 
has not been able to find any cases in which any mental impres- 
sion could be conveyed to, or any nervous effect produced upon, 
a mesmerized subject, without a sufficient physical* cause being 
found. Isolate the agent and the subject from each other, and 
no impression or action whatever can pass from one to the 
other. 

If the investigation of thought-transference is to be still fur- 
ther pursued by us, it may be useful to point out the condi- 
tions under which we should expect it to be found. One of 
these must be found in the case of the man who is surrounded 
by a crowd watching a pyrotechnic display. Within a few 
yards of him there are a hundred people who simultaneously 
receive upon their minds the startling impression of a brilliant 
rocket. If there is such a thing as telepathy, then, a person 
standing in the middle of the crowd, with his eyes closed and his 
ears filled with wax, ought to know just when the rocket appears, 
by a mental tremor of some kind, not traceable to any physical 
agency. I suggest this as one very simple experiment on the 
subject. 

Let us take another case. West of the Mississippi River 
there are probably several hundred thousand persons whose 
chief amusement is the playing of a game of cards, in which a 
knowledge of the cards which another person right in front of 
him is looking at, or even the power to make a probable guess 
on the subject, would lead rapidly to success and fortune. Yet 
not a case has ever been known to arise in which a player could 
get the slighest inkling of what sort of a hand his opponent held 
by any process of mind-reading. Is it not worth our while to 
institute an investigation among the players of this game? 

The question may arise whether the non-occurrence of the 
phenomenon under those circumstances where we should most 
suspect it is not due to the rarity of some special power. This 
hypothesis is however negatived by the observations of our 
parent society, already mentioned. We have seen that three 
or four children and a waiting-maid were found in a single 



Address of the President. 

family, all of whom could name cards which other persons had 
simply looked at, and could even guess a number which another 
person thought of. Now, if the power were really rare, what is 
the probability that four persons possessing it would be found 
in a single family? We should have to wander among the in- 
finities to investigate it. Possibly it might be suggested that 
heredity would result in one possessing the same powers that 
others did. But heredity could not extend to the waiting-maid 
of the family, unless we introduce some such new biological 
hypothesis as the absorption of one person's powers by another. 
Not only were four or five of the persons found in one family, 
but in other cases two or more were found at work in the same 
factory. Now, adopt what theory we ma} 7 , this curious group- 
ing of persons endowed with the power prevents us from re- 
garding it as sporadic. We must form the hypothesis, that, 
when one individual possesses it, there is a certain chance of its 
passing to another individual who chances to be an inmate of 
the same family. But, if we adopt this hypothesis, how shall 
we prevent it from spreading through the whole community ? 
In fine, what rational hypothesis can we form to explain every 
thing? If we grant that thought-transference is a fact, just 
how are we to limit it? How explain its apparent absence 
under circumstances where we should most suspect it? What 
prevents any one person from being influenced by the thoughts 
and feelings of the whole thousand million of other people who 
live in the world? In the absence of any answer by the 
Psychical Society, I shall suggest one : The intensity of the 
effect diminishes very rapidly with the distance. 

If this be the case, it should increase very rapidly as the dis- 
tance diminishes ; and of this no evidence has been found. Nor 
is the hypothesis of dependence upon distance supported by all 
the facts. In some of the most striking cases on record, the 
parties were separated by miles ; I am not sure but continents 
or oceans have occasionally intervened. 

It appears, therefore, that not only has no theory of thought- 
transference been constructed, but it does not seem possible 
even to imagine any one simple theory, or set of general laws, 
which will explain all the phenomena. I beg leave to say once 
more, that what we want is a statement of general laws, like 



Address of the President. 

those which we find in books on mechanics, electricity, magnet- 
ism, or physiology, setting forth the conditions under which 
thought-transference can be brought about. That no such 
work has appeared, or been attempted, can, it seems to me, be 
accounted for only by the fact just brought out, that no one set 
of principles can be formulated that will cover all the supposed 
tacts. 

When, some two years ago, the early experiments of the Eng- 
lish psychical society were made known, it seemed to me that 
a strong case was made out for a new law of nature governing 
the transmission of thought, or some form of mental influence 
from person to person. The state of the case I suppose to be 
that a number of members found themselves permanently able 
to copy drawings without other guidance than the thoughts of 
other members not in physical contact with them. Under the 
influence of this possibility, I encouraged the formation of our 
own society, and accepted membership in it. 

Beino- thus interested in the work, mv first act was verv natu- 
rally to enter upon a more critical and careful study of the work 
of the parent society. I soon noticed that in its essential fea- 
tures it differed remarkably from what I had supposed. It lost 
the character of generality which I had attributed to it. As 
the result of the circumstances which I have already considered, 
I may say that the work of the society seems to me to have 
almost entirely removed any ground which might have existed 
for believing thought-transference to be a reality. I have seen 
nothing in our own work to change that conclusion. Every 
wide consideration which occurs to me leads in the same direc- 
tion. We are not dealing primarily with a question of quantity 
and degree, but with one of yes or no. Considered in ad-' 
vance of experience, it may be an open question whether thought 
in its very nature is or is not transferable. Whether we regard 
thought as simply the working of our own organism, or regard 
our minds as inhabiting our nervous systems, it may be true 
in either case that our minds are absolutely incapable of exert- 
ing an actio in distant. Now. if this be true as an essential qual- 
ity of mind, then the verv expression M thought-transference " 
involves an impossibility. But granting that it is true, and that 
thought may be transferred, then reflect upon the number of 



Address of the President, 

people who surround us, and the infinity of the conditions under 
which thought might he transferred. How is it that with such 
ample opportunities of experiment extending through centuries, 
and such industry as has been devoted to the subject here and 
in England through the last two years, no living person knows 
any more about the conditions of transference to-day than men 
did a thousand years ago ? 

The question suggests itself whether the search for the 
phenomena under present circumstances is not much that of 
looking for a kind of gold which shall differ in density from 
ordinary gold, or for a substance of unheard-of specific gravity. 
We may advertise for specimens of such things, and execute 
many weighings, with a view of testing claimants to our atten- 
tion. Yet I am persuaded that, should we undertake this., the 
unanimous views of chemists would be that we were wasting 
our labor. The negative evidence that no gold has been found 
differing much in specific gravity from that which we carry in 
our pockets is conclusive against its existence. 

Whether we should take the same view of thought-transfer- 
ence is a question on which I refrain from expressing a decided 
opinion, for the reason that no such opinion is necessary. Even 
if there is no real thought-transference, we have cases of appar- 
ent thought-transference to investigate and explain, which may 
lead us to the discovery of new laws of mental action. 

An illustration of the line of research here indicated may not 
be out of place. The largest collection of facts made by our 
parent society comprises occurrences of the following general 
character. A person, generally one not subject to hallucina- 
tions, suddenly receives an impression the cause of which he 
cannot define. Commonly it is the visual image of some absent 
friend or relative in a state of suffering, or the voice of a speaker 
calling aloud, or the impression a pain not associated with any 
physical cause. After a few hours, days, or weeks, news is 
received from the friend that something had happened to him 
at the very moment the impression had been received, bearing 
too close relation to the impression for a mere accidental co-in- 
cidence. Very often the case is one of the death of the friend. 
Sometimes he cried aloud in pain, and used the very words 
which the other heard. 



Address of the- President. 

Such is the order of events as commonly described ; but, if 
described as they actually come to knowledge, they would ap- 
pear iii a different form. The experience of the observer would 
be : I heard that my friend was dead, or that he had met with 
an accident and cried aloud. After inquiring when the death 
or accident occurred, I remembered that about that time I heard 
tins very exclamation, or saw his image before my <eyes. 

Now, we have two theories on which this may be explained. 
It may be that there was a real transfer from the friend to the 
percipient ; or the whole recollection may have been the work 
of the percipient's mind at the time, — a mere illusion of the 
memory. My own experience leads me to believe that these 
illusions are more common and more difficult to distinguish 
from the reality than generally supposed. I have no reason to 
consider myself in any unusual degree the victim of illusions ; 
yet I frequently find vague impressions in my mind the reality 
of which I am unable either to deny or affirm. They may have 
been dreams, and they may have been occurrences. I fre- 
quently have a dream which I forget all about until a day or 
two afterwards, when perhaps some impression produced in the 
dream is brought to mind. Having totally forgotten that I 
had any dream at all, I am often at a loss to say whether the 
impression is that of something which I really saw, or some- 
thing which I dreamed of. I do not remember ever to have 
had an hallucination in my waking hours, but dream halluci- 
nations I find not at all uncommon. It may not be out of 
place if I relate one, which, after the lapse of more than a year, 
I am still unable to classify with certainty as a reality or illu- 
sion. * 

I dined with friends at a hotel, later and more generously 
than was my custom, and retired without the post-prandial air- 
ing necessary in my case to sound sleep. The window of my 
room in the hotel was directly above the kitchen, and I was 
much disturbed b} r noise coming from that quarter. Some time 
in the night, I cannot tell when, I heard, or thought I heard, 
a window opened above my room, and the voice of a guest call- 
ing in a loud voice to the servants below, " If you don't stop 
that racket, I will get up and leave the hotel." The whole im- 
pression was so vivid that I have ever since been in doubt 



Address of the President. 

whether it was a dream or a reality, with perhaps slight proba- 
bilities in favor of its being a dream. 

I believe that our dream life and our imaginative powers are 
more potent factors in the production of supposed extraordi- 
nary phenomena than is commonly supposed. Whatever may 
be the fate of the theory of thought-transference, the phenom- 
ena of hypnotisms, as well as of dreams, illusions, and faults 
of memory, are all before us. They form a field of which the 
cultivation has only commenced, and which ought to prove 
attractive to all. I even venture to say, that, if thought-trans- 
ference is real, we shall establish its reality more speedily by 
leaving it out of consideration, and collecting facts for study, 
than by directing our attention especially to it. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



022 194 247 4 



